Court Invalidates Protected Witnesses Of The FGR In The Trial Against The Wife Of 'Mencho'.

 ”Ivan”for Borderland Beat 

The Attorney General’s Office (FGR) suffered a new judicial setback, after a court invalidated the testimonies of three protected witnesses or collaborators in the criminal process for money laundering against Rosalinda González Valencia, wife of Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, El Mencho, founder and leader of the Jalisco Cartel – New Generation (CJNG).

According to criminal touch 24/2022, the FGR’s stumble is due to a serious omission by the Prosecutor’s Office itself during the investigation process related to criminal case 12//2018, since it never requested a control judge for a special hearing to justify the reservation of identity of the three collaborating witnesses who were going to testify about the operations with resources of illicit origin of the CJNG to acquire real estate and finance companies related to Rosalinda González Valencia and her daughter Jessica Johanna Oseguera González, convicted in the United States for money laundering.

According to Aristegui Noticias, on May 20, Magistrate Fernando Issac Ibarra Gómez, head of the First Unitary Court of the State of Morelos, issued this ruling in which he also warned that the Attorney General’s Office “did not present any argument” to reverse the decision made by a Control Judge assigned to the Federal Criminal Justice Center of Cuernavaca, Morelos, during the intermediate hearing that took place between April 1 and 8.

The judicial decision warns that according to article 22 of the National Code of Criminal Procedures (CNPP), the confidentiality of the identity of witnesses must be expressly and exceptionally authorized by a control judge, in order to ensure the success of the investigation or to guarantee the protection of persons, after the hearing of the indictment and before the formal accusation is filed.”The judge of control, if he considers such request to be appropriate, will so decide, determining the term of the reserve, provided that this information is timely disclosed so as not to affect the right of defense. Said reserve may be extended when strictly necessary, but may not be extended until after the indictment has been filed”, warns the resolution.

Therefore, since there is no evidence in the investigation file to prove that the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office resorted to a judicial control hearing to request the confidentiality of the identity of the collaborating witnesses, thus violating the constitutional principles and the due process against the accused.

“However, witnesses of reserved identity were offered as evidence and were not subject to judicial control, since there is no such resolution, which is indispensable, and without having been disproved in the debate. For this reason, the aforementioned evidence should be excluded”, states the judgment in this case.The argument of the Attorney General’s Office regarding the protection of the identity of its protected witnesses was that they complied with the provisions of the law, since they were enrolled in the protection program of the Attorney General’s Office and were willing to appear at the oral trial hearing. 

However, for the federal judge, this procedure does not replace judicial control, so it was essential that the investigation file had a copy of the authorization issued by the control judge to keep the identity of such witnesses confidential until the oral trial stage.

Protected witnesses

In addition, the appellate court itself confirmed the exclusion of other witnesses of the Federal Ministerial Police of the Prosecutor’s Office who carried out surveillance and follow-up work at the home of the wife of El Mencho, who observed the movement of heavily armed people around the properties occupied by the family of the CJNG leader, arguing that the testimonies of the investigating agents are “impertinent” to prove the illicit nature of the resources and the relationship of Rosalinda Gonzalez with the criminal group.

Although the invalidation of these six witnesses does not imply a definitive defeat for the Attorney General’s Office, since the Prosecutor General’s Office can still challenge this resolution before a collegiate court, it may affect the theory of the case that the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office will present before the trial court.

The Prosecutor’s Office itself recognizes that the testimony of the collaborating witnesses “is fundamental” and “essential” to present its theory of the case against Rosalinda González Valencia, since they are “sources of information” that prove the links of the accused with an organized crime group and the illegal origin of the financial resources and assets she managed.

But due to the omission of the Prosecutor’s Office itself to guarantee the confidentiality of the witnesses’ identities, giving the defense of the accused the opportunity to challenge their validity, the Public Prosecutor’s Office will be forced to present a different argumentation to sustain its criminal accusation against the family of Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, “El Mencho”.

(With information from Aristegui Noticias)

RIODOCE